‘THAT’S FOOTBALL’ ⚽️ Jason Cundy HITS BACK At Netherlands Players Sulking Over The Penalty Decision
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ค. 2024
- Jason Cundy believes England were rightly awarded a penalty in their 2-1 victory over Holland.
Subscribe: / talksport
Enjoyed this TH-cam video? 😍
🖥️ talkSPORT's Website: talksport.com/
📲 talkSPORT's Twitter: / talksport
📷 talkSPORT's Instagram: talksport?...
👤 talkSPORT's Facebook: / talksport
📱 talkSPORT's Tik Tok: / talksport
🔴 Download the talkSPORT app HERE! - talksport.com/apps/
🔎 Want to see if you feature on our TH-cam channel? Check out our Best talkSPORT callers playlist: • The BEST talkSPORT Cal...
#talkSPORT
#euro2024 - กีฬา
![[ไฮไลต์] แบดมินตันชาย SHI Yu Qi (จีน) vs วิว กุลวุฒิ (ไทย) รอบ 8 คน | โอลิมปิก 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/f7z7taforOM/mqdefault.jpg)
If this had have been other way round the geniuses on talksport wouldn't shut up about it for months. 😅😅
It's happened to England for years. Right back to maradonna 86, and many more injustices since. I can tell you only have a 'last 10 years of football max' level of football history in your brain.
Cant wait for the discussion if Spain get one on Sunday.
They get one then they get one, so if we come to lose because of one penalty decision then we never did enough to win, like the Dutch.
@zkwz1 Exactly,you will see how they will be calling all conspiracy theories......
Can we wait for you to cry if we get one again
@@georgesalano5771cry more
@@zkwz1 stop crying little man
Not a penalty because of saka handball!!!!
Remember that lampard shot that cross the line that the ref didn't count against Germany in world cup
There was no VAR or goal line technology then
@@keletsosebolai414justice has no bias🥳
@@thomashopley2705 Justice is coming Sunday
@@keletsosebolai414If they lose, the reactions are going to be golden 😂
remember how the ref robbed germany in 1966
if Spain get a penalty like that keep the same energy don't sulk
Englands “world class” players are about to get a schooling by a real team - and they know it.
@@hughjanus3616you've all been saying that since the Denmark game!
When England lift the trophy please don't cry! 🤣🤣🤣
@@hughjanus3616you wouldn’t know what a real team is and you wouldn’t know football if it wasn’t for England😂
@@sithemperorpalpatine870 hardly been saying that with the dream draw they had.. they're now playing a team that has a real chance of beating them.. I'm English, but want Spain to win
If someone punches the striker 10 seconds after his shot is that still a penalty?!?
If it's in the box hell yes
Standard in rugby lol proper game.
@@big_english8787no
@@big_english8787no ball in game. No pen but red card.
Be fair.... If it was the other way round, England will sue the refs
If it was the other way around it would be like every other tournament lmao.
Can't sure then, but world complain
I’d still be crying in my beer.
When did we sue refs?
If that penalty was given against England, we would be losing our minds
Mate ,you haven't been allowed to launch yourself at anyone on a pitch with your studs up for 30 years ,he was lucky not to get a red card .
@@johndowds5770you’re mad John 😂 the studs weren’t even towards Kane. Have a closer look. Also Sake made a handball just before the moment
@@AkimboTimbo them lemons you're eating are bitter . By the way I'm Irish and have no dog in this fight .
What is he on about? Koeman and the Dutch have been very magnanimous is defeat and I’ve so much respect for them.
The most controversial thing was, the VAR decision explainer lady, immediatley came on air and in her American accent explained, it's no penalty
@@the-gang-of-wolves she was completely correct though. 🤷
Ball hits Saka hand before kane shot. What is var for ? It cannot pick up obvious handball on screen replay
I'm sure if it was the other way around, they would have a completely different attitude
3 secs late would be the most blatant penalty ever 😂
Never a pen
Penalty or no penalty: It wasn't an obvious refereeing error. So he shouldn't have been called to the monitor.
Definitely a penalty
You can’t block with studs up. If that was out the box, it would be a foul and no one would say a thing
@alfieb6711 that makes it a foul? You've just argued against your own point, doesnt matter what his intention was if he's late he's late and that's a foul
@@CallumGTFCnot enough contact to make it clear and obvious it’s not clear obvious
If he goes to the monitor also show Saka’s handball right before 🤷🏻♂️ questionable penalty, hand ball by saka just before -> no penalty
@@danh555 Yes you can block with stud up as long it isn't dangerous play. It's a soft pen and if being English and that had gone against us I'd be fuming. Saying that - we had one go our way for once
SAKA hands the ball 5 seconds b4 the clash between Kane and Dumfriess how did Var not see this?
Too many people in the comments section are asking the wrong question. It's not whether it's a penalty or no penalty. It's did Dumfries commit a foul? If that same type of play (and Kane is volleying a pass down the field) happens in the middle of the park and Dumfries catches him late, it's a foul every day of the week. And if it's a foul, then the ref has to call a penalty.
They weren't this vocal when the referee helped them massively against Turkey
Exactly.
@@intenzityd3181 Not a penalty but Holland was awful and finished 3rd in their group. Turkey missed their key defender for a stupid ban.
Who in the fking world would would deny a positive being in your favour? You think Messi told the referee he scored a goal using his hands? Or Ronaldo tells the referee he was offside? Be realistic kid
@@hus390definitely a penalty
Can’t have studs up block like that. Would be a foul anywhere else.
Shot taken before clash. No penalty. Maybe a booking for dumfries. But his foul didn't effect kanes shot. @@danh555
The defender realised that he was second to the ball. He didn't try to kick it but lifted his foot and presented the soul and studs to block Kane.
What you be saying if it happened against England you would be crying
We've had enough of our share of bad calls you will have to forgive us if we couldn't care less.
We'd have listen to them whinge for 2 years.
Well it didn’t t ya plank
@jamjam2833 What if it did you would be the first one crying like a little girl no that is the problem with var corruption
@@lifeasewokchewie like you are now😂
Only the English fans think it was a penalty lol lol
Stud's up penalty..
Shame no one is talking about the handball that saka did before it went to harry kane. So shouldn't have been a penalty and never a penalty kane kicked his foot not Dumfries kicked kanes
I’m English fan, but I’m also & More Importantly a fan of FOOTBALL,
& even I’m saying, That Was NEVER A Penalty!! 💯
And anyone who reads the rule book.
Studs up- penalty.
You're just letting Ur hate fog common sense. Ie... Ur thick
It was never a penalty. But half the hand balls aren't penalties either.
2024: its a penalty
2014: never a penalty
that's the state of the modern game
@@ClarenceBoddicker87that goal is what prompted fifa to get of their as, because rugby, cricket l, tennis all had tech for years but fifa refused cause they're cheap & corrupt. But there would've been riots of it ever happeneded again
Never s pen
What about the saka hand ball before kane kicks the ball.
Why are they not talking saka handball.???
It wasn't like Dumfries just stuck his foot up to block the shot, his studs were up and his leg/foot was extending towards and thru Kane's foot.
Yeah but imagine that decision happening to us I’d be heartbroken if they gave the Dutch a penalty for Kane kicking there man. It’s not a penalty no matter what happens. If we had went out to a penalty like that if we’d been 1,0 up and it went the other way I’d be furious. The defender has to attempt to block the shot he’s not late his studs are not showing it’s Kane who follows through and kicks Dumfries. I could only imagine the reaction if we’d have had that against us and told to suck it up. Our media would’ve crucified that referee as being corrupt as they had done already in the build up so can you imagine the reaction if we’d have been on the other side of that penalty. No danger that’s a pen in an any football game and for Cundy to say if it went the other way he’d still agree it was the right decision. Yeah so you would. They would’ve been going crazy over every media outlet saying the ref conned us.
Thank you, finally someone is honest as well
I've said EXACTLY the same. If he disrupts the shooting, then it's a foul, it of he's really late, but it's only 2 frames. Is he supposed to let Harry on through like a servant bowing for a lord? Both players feet were high, so why did only 1 get the yellow
@@kurtsudheim825 it’s actually embarrassing that all the media are not even trying to say anything about how bad a decision it was. Instead they’re all making excuses about why it is a pen. Quite simply the whole of England and the media would be going absolutely ballistic over that decision. They would want the referee banned it would be complete mayhem form the media and pundits and it would be spoken about for years and years & the referee would be getting massive amounts of abuse from all England fans. ✌️
It’s a penalty
You can’t block a shot with studs up
Would be a foul anywhere else. Why doesn’t anyone know this? Even amateurs know you don’t block studs up
@@danh555 his studs are not up. What about Kane he gets the shot away there legs are at the same height. It a coming together insinuated by kane shooting!! So is the defender not to make an attempt to block the shot? Yes and it’s Kane who followed through on the his strike and hit Dumfries boot. It’s a contact sport it’s not a foul anywhere atoll or the defender is just not meant to raise his foot to the same level as the ball and the striker’s foot. Of course he can, but as I said it doesn’t effect Harry’s shot. It called a coming together after the reaction of the strike. Which Kane managed to get so much power his follow through is the cause of the collision. IMO.✌️Also imagine what would’ve happened to that referee from our fans and media think about that. The ref would’ve been getting abused from everyone and all the soacial media threats would be of the scale.
If a keeper comes out of box and clears it' forward does same block and leaves studs up' its a free to keeper
About time England got rub of green.
Maradona
Lampard against Germany
Koeman 30 years ago
Etc
Well said Cundy!
You mean like when Spain scored two good goals that were disallowed in Euro96? One of the surest biases is forgetting the fortune in your favour.
Tackling studs up is considered dangerous, simple.
Then he misses the ball and connects to Kanes foot. It’s a foul
So must he just let Kane shoot?
You got that wrong kane kicked his foot not other way round. Also did you not see the handball saka did for it to go to kane so should never have been a penalty
But he wasn’t tackling. It was a late block, not even his studs towards Kane. The ball was already shot. And Kane was kicking him not the other way around. Kane falling on the ground like a dying swan. Absolute disgrace… Ridiculous decision.
@@AkimboTimbo Hi Tim
I don’t think it really matters what I believe, more a q. Of what’s the evidence for VAR and the Ref. A chest high, studs up challenge that misses the ball but connects to Kane, in the penalty area doesn’t look good!
So many lucky decisions have gone in team’s favour in major tournaments and they all think it’s part of the game …Why do England have to be super honest..Was it a penalty..Who cares .🤷🏻♂️
I think English football is past that now. We've had too much pain. Playing fair is for simps. These guys will play to win, even if you've got to be a bit dirty to get it over the line.
@@KTopics 100% …clear the conscience .
It's anti-English sentiment masked up in all sorts of football excuses. These decisions get made every tournament and you don't see this level of sulking. And frequently decisions go against England.
(1). Both players feet were up. (2). The ball was already kicked. (3). Collusion occurred after the shot. = Not a penalty. Holland was awful and finished 3rd in their group. Turkey missed their key defender for a stupid ban.
Exactly, so if both feet were high, why only 1 booked? Ball was gone, now if it was 5 secs late, sure, that's a foul, but not when it's literally in the frame
Logically not a pen. Rules of the game - it is a pen
3 seconds late is attempted murder mate 😂😂😂
The whole idea of the talk sport show is to divide opinion and create endless pointless debates and then drag that debate out as long as possible.
What Baggio did to recover was amazing too. Missed that 94 final penalty then in France 98 he scored that first penalty for Italy in their opening group game. That was huge pressure I remember at the time.
Atleast we all agree england were given favours n it wasnt a penalty😂😂
@victorowino386 if it makes you feel better you can all agree with each other as much as you like they lost and we are in the final. 🖕
Yes because if it was the other way, Cundy would be sitting here saying “that’s football”
The Dutch weren’t sulking btw. They all said how they felt but then added that they didn’t lose because of it, they had all the time in the world to win it and didn’t.
They needed the ref to beat Turkey they should have just stfu. If they actually were the better team on the night they might have a point but the way they act is desperation.
But they did list because of it, they got the goal & sat back.
England fans still moaning about Maradona.
Where? 😂
If the penalty decision was anywhere else on the pitch, it'd be a free kick without question, in any league.
It's unfair to call it sour grapes. It shouldn't have been a pen
Anybody criticising anybody for missing a penalty or anything on a football pitch is a sad sack.
Hands was made to create the chance for Kane to shoot. Making the penalty even more controversial.
5:04 5:23 Van Dijk is talking about the game in general being in their favour, not the referee decision anymore
It shouldn't even matter, English player had a handball in the box before Kane's shot.
Why do they keep say its coming home?
Its not the World Cup. Its the Euros....
The saying its "coming home" is meant for the big one. The world cup . As we did in 1966.
arriving 3 seconds late to a challenge is assault 😂
Exactly, then it's a foul, but he saw asmt 3 seconds late now was he, that's the point, he attempted to block the shoct, perfectly legal. & shot is gone, if he knocks his keg during shotting that's a foul, but ball was fine
Had he scored would they have brought it back for a pen?
@@eddieherrera5314That's not how the rules work 🙄
Was never ever a pen u muppet
Yes. A booking for the foul AFTER kanes shot. But never a penalty.
If this had happened to england, he would be going mental call the penalty decision a joke etc
Some of the Dutch are going on like that penalty was the worst ever decision in the history of football. Compared to Hand of God, Lampard’s goal that never was and Koeman not getting sent off, I’d say it was pretty minor.
I agree with them. Those were honest mistakes. This referee had many views of it. In VAR era mistakes are rightly no longer be tolerated.
I said it wasn’t a pen a first but after hearing cundy say that about strikers trying block it and defenders get free kicks he is right they get that everytime. Kane shoots 3 seconds later keeper slaps him in the box that’s still a pen no matter how later it is after the shot
England have been on the other end tons of time...I can think of 10 examples of these type of decisions happening in the Prem this year.
Studs up penalty simple
Stone cold not a penalty
@sskengineering8474 late and studs up it was soft but do explain how it was never a pen lol 😆
@@Sketch2805StudiosKane kicks his foot, not a penalty
@@jamesm9995 if his studs were down then no pen lol
@@jamesm9995 no matey kick kanes foot if anything as he came in late with studs up so it was a pen, and if you can say if it was outside the box it's a free kick so therefore it's a pen in the box a foul is a foul everywhere on the pitch
If a player passes a ball and someone fouls him late in the middle of the park is it a free kick ?? Mental times
Yes for a “Late challenge”, but that wasn’t the case here, 🤷♂️
Kane Took the Shot & kicked the defender on the follow through, that’s not a foul & it’s only Harry Kane’s Theatrics (AGAIN) that bought the penalty & that’s why its cheating!! 👌👍
I understand why the dutch were upset with that decision. I would be if it was us. But we actually deserved to win. That should soften the blow somewhat. We actually deserved it for the first time in this tournament.
You just answered your own point, people where split on weather it was a pen, and that's why VAR should never have got involved, they meaning the ref in charge of a game still does not know the rules.Its there written down in black and white.VAR should only get ever get involved if its a CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERROR, why is that so difficult to understand and also the game is not played in slow motion unless your watching the women's game so why do the refs make there decisions based on slow motion replays but the premier league voted to keep this mess going so don't complain because you made your bed now you lie in it.
If Dumfries goes down injured and holds his foot after Kane’s contact with him and Kane isn’t hurt and appealing, is a penalty still given? I’m not so sure.
The Dutch wernt complaining when they were sending in flying kicks all over the putch against the spanish... i dont think amy of them got a red either...
Surely a hench dutch defender and his leading studs at your foot will effect your shot
Poor Virgil, he has that Scouse Victim Mentality down to a tee
England got a lucky pen vs Denmark in the last semis as well
We also didn't conceed a single goal from open play all tournament. But nobody ever wants to talk about that do they? Far easier to bleat about how lucky we are apparently.
@@KTopicsof course you didn't you fool. Look who you play against.
@@KTopicsthere's a team trophy for that?
Cry
@georgesalano5771 no I was simply counter arguing with the other individual that england were not 'lucky' to make it past the semis in that tournament. Just like we aren't 'lucky' to be in the final in this one, despite the other individual claiming otherwise.
I agree with Jason Cundy (and Ian Wright) on the penalty. As far as I'm aware a penalty is awarded when a defender commits a foul inside the defender's Box. It is not a question of whether the defender was trying to block the ball, it is a question of whether or not a foul was committed. Outside of the box probably a free kick would have been awarded and there would have been little or no controversy. Of course the Ref might have gone the other way so in the end it's the Ref's decision based on the rules. We are not talking about a blatent gift to the England team here unlike the gift of the 'hand of god' given to Argentinia years ago!
Exactly, & is not a foul, that's the point. Of he disrupts Harry shot, it's a foul, of its really late, that's usually ill intent or recklessness, that's a foul.. but he was only 2 frames late. He was going for the block, he's perfectly allowed to do that, what do you want him to wave Harry on through? Ball was fine, so Harry already had clean shot. It's a contract sport, players can still touch each other
@kurtsudheim825 late is late, and if he 'disrupted' the shot that means he got the ball which then isn't a foul, but he didn't get the ball he got Harry's ankle after the ball had gone I.e late
The reason why it’s not a foul because where dumphries puts his foot it’s essentially Harry Kane foot that goes into him not the other way round. Kane follow through causes the collision not dumpries attempt to block the shot lol
@rickyroberts5215 how does that make sense? He's kicking a ball he has to follow through, youve never played the game have you? Dumfries foot isn't just hanging in mid air is it, he's made contact with kane and not the ball, so it's a foul, regardless of whether kane is following through after his shot or not, what it again and you'll see it, unless you're to biased to admit it
@@CallumGTFCshut up about ive not played football, mate how many time do people shoot and then get taken out by a keeper, do we give a penalty then no, or when a player slides to block a shot but the player gets his shot off then taken out by the play no one gives a foul, if we conceded that pen you’d be Fumming. Kane foot has followed through the ball and hit dunpries foot. Games gone stupid because of Idiat’s like you
Pay back time for Koeman when he should got sent off and we should have had a penalty
Probably wasn't even born
First a Russian linesman now a German ref ,dodgy England
If that pen was given against England, these 2 would've be going ludacris lol they would've brought up the info on the ref being banned before etc.
It is a penalty in the letter of the law, but no, it shouldn't be classed as a penalty.
That was not a foul nor should it b a penalty. But this will continue because there is no consistency in criticism when the decisions land ur way. Smfh
Two wrongs don't make a right. Apparently because England had bad decisions go against them then when one goes for them that's ok.
it was definitely a foul so why can it then suddenly not be a penalty?? Is it a different set of rules for defenders in the box?
I've seen worse penalties given definitely. It's mostly sour grapes from foreigners let's be honest.
Anywhere else on the pitch it’s a foul so why shouldn’t it be a penalty, studs up is dangerous play and a penalty
If that GERMAN referee had given that decision AGAINST England he'd be getting de th threats from the lovely English fans!
Hypocrisy at its finest y’all where on madrids case when the referee messed up
Why would they care about Madrid??
Shout out that’s football 😂😂
You lot have changed your tune.
SUCK IT UP, perfect 😂
Nonsense, yes it halogens, but it shouldn't. That wasn't a pen, & they have va right to complain, not forever but rn. How was many times has Jason himself silked over bad decisions, if it didn't go England way we'd all be accessibility, & have done so before
Player goes past a keeper and the keeper catches the player but the ball goes out a pen is given, so where is the difference?
Lots are missing the obvious and VAR put it up on the screen. Reckless attempt to when the ball as the England player went to play the ball.
Keep the same energy when it’s against you
So if a defender is chasing an attacker and the attacker gets a shot off but the defender kicks him after its still a red card and a freekick or penalty
it wasnt just the penalty though, factor in the england players dropping after a light breeze and bellingham falling and crying everytime one of his moves fail and its a weak way of playing
Nah mate you're talking nonsense 😂
You're blinded by your own bias if you think any of that actually happened
I think the penalty was given solely because it very much almost injured Kane, studs to the top of the foot can break bones,and at the very least be extremely painful, it doesn't matter if its malicious or not, the rule introduced at the start of the tournament was no studs up!
But regardless England were going to win that game no matter what.
Why are the Dutch bitter they weren’t the better team.
That's now how football works. You can be worse for the entire match and still win. I'm sure you know this.
Maybe kane had already shot but since were 'late tackles not fouls'?
in 1478 that's never a penalty but this is 2024 and we no longer disembowel people during football matches
That is a penalty all day. Remove VAR and it's still a penalty. I want Spain to win so bad but that is a penalty. Hala Madrid.
How can he say that the brilliant thing about football is that it's subjective? Wouldn't it be better when the game does not get so heavilly influenced by one referee's decisions? It's weird to me that a play like this can happen and fans can be so divided on wether it's a foul or not. But hey if the fans don't mind the rules and refereeing then i guess the rules are fine as is.
England were the better team over 90mins
On a fair analysis it was an easy penalty to give,let me hope we won't hear you all whinning here when it's the other way round.
They got played off the park, if they played better they would have won! How can they say they deserved to win?
They were 1-0 up mate, duh they sat back
Sat back ?for 80 mins of the rest of the game, are you deluded?
@@kurtsudheim825 bitter??? lol
@@findyourwayban1498 he's extremely bitter mate, he's commented loads of times just clutching at straws, he's either extremely biased or utterly clueless, or a bit of both
@@kurtsudheim825yeah 1 goal isn't as much as 2 dumbass... Studs up - Penalty. It's simple... But not simple enough for ur dumbass to understand
Studs showing is dangerous play. Thought that was the term used.
Never a penalty
Studs in on anyone with the ball, without the ball, 3 seconds after, 10 minutes is still a foul right?
Hve to agree with Cundy on both points. Holland can go do one. They parked the bus the entire game.
The tackle put Kane off and was late and studs high !
The problem is, rightly or wrongly, people subliminally think it's only a penalty is a potential goal scoring move is stopped by an action. In this case, Kane got a clean shot away which missed so doesn't fit that mindset. A better example than Cundy's would be if the ball was played along the ground and Kane knocked it to the side whilst Dumphries was sliding in, who takes out Kane without getting the ball the most people would say stone wall pen. This is principally the same thing but in the air and instead of an evasive move of the ball it was a shot.
(1). Both players feet were up. (2). The ball was already kicked. (3). Collusion occurred after the shot. = Not a penalty. (4). Holland was awful and finished 3rd in their group. Turkey missed their key defender for a stupid ban.
It was a penalty. Studs up and contact made. Intent is irrelevant it's a foul, the location makes it a penalty. Dangerous play that impacted Kane's ability to finish.
Hand of god 1986 you lot are still talking about it.
Jesuswon a pen for Arsenal vs Liverpool at emirates and its similar
It was a pen because the ref said it was. Should it have been? For me, no. It was a weak pen at best. But goodness knows we've had bad decisions against us over the years. As a fan, there's nothing you can do about it.
clear penalty for me. Dumfries is late and coming in with the studs first.
Also if he comes in 3 seconds late it should still be a penalty. Simply because that would have been a challenge without the ball present, so you're clearly just going for the man.
That's the most stupid question I've ever heard.
Imagine Kane taking a shot, misses. Then Dumfries walks up to him and knocks him out with an uppercut.
No penalty because the ball is out of play?
BUT, what ever happened with indirect freekicks inside the penalty area?
Should this been one of those instead of a penalty?
According to the rulebook, 12.2 Indirect Free kick
An indirect free kick is awarded if a player:
- plays in a dangerous manner
I would say it could fall underneath that and be an indirect free kick instead.
Justice will be served by the Spanish.
These conversations are so boring in comparison to the Colombia vs Uruguay brawl lmao.
dangerous play